Some more thoughts on "anti grappling".

[geezer]

So it takes years to get right And it seems to take thirty seconds of aiming before you can fire it off. Honestly not the biggest threat

Correction: First, let's de-mystify things a bit and use the generic term "short-power". You can find it in Western boxing, Chinese boxing ("kung fu") Filipino boxing (FMA "cadena de mano") and just about any other well developed striking system. It takes years for some of us (me, for example) to get it right. Others develop surprisingly explosive "short power" early on. And yeah, they can be a big threat. My old Escrima instructor learned it from his Filipino coach as a teen and later used it very effectively as a boxer in the U.S. Airforce.

Of course "short power" alone isn't enough. But it's a great tool in the context of a good fighting system.

 

[Argus]

So it takes years to get right And it seems to take thirty seconds of aiming before you can fire it off. Honestly not the biggest threat

You're awfully quick to poke fun at something you don't understand. I've met both Wing Chun and Xingyi practitioners who demonstrated very good short distance power -- not just as a parlour trick, but in free application, and both with and without any pretense of exhibiting it in the first place. It's neither a parlour trick, nor some unattainable magic that takes decades of practice. It's just takes simple practice; practice which, honestly, most practitioners really tend to neglect and don't spend enough time on to be confident their ability to hit that way. And, that's a category in which I might include myself.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I still think Johns "test" for striking vs grappling is pretty unrealistic.

If we include the following into the test:

1. body shot - the moment that you punch at your opponent's chest, your head will be exposed for his head lock.
2. parry - the moment that your arm touch your opponent's big fist, the moment that he can separate his arms and wrap your parrying arm.
3. kick - the moment that you kick at your opponent, the moment that he can grab you leg.
- ...

Your testing result will include too many factors. It will be more than just a test for "head punch vs. clinch". It will be a test for "kick/punch vs. clinch". IMO, both tests will be needed. One should start from simple and move into complicate.

 

[Argus]

If we include the following into the test:

1. body shot - the moment that you punch at your opponent's chest, your head will be exposed for his head lock.
2. parry - the moment that your arm touch your opponent's big fist, the moment that he can separate his arms and wrap your parrying arm.
3. kick - the moment that you kick at your opponent, the moment that he can grab you leg.
- ...

Your testing result will include too many factors. It will be more than just a test for "head punch vs. clinch". It will be a test for "kick/punch vs. clinch". IMO, both tests will be needed. One should start from simple and move into complicate.

I think you're over doing it on the numbered lists and "A vs B" statements.

Earlier, I just described a technique whereby I like to wrap a grappler's arm while striking his neck and controlling his head. I don't have to be a grappler to control my opponent or utilize locks; nor would I really call that "grappling" when you maintain effective striking distance. You seem to be under the impression that only a grappler can utilize control, and that a striker is therefore at his mercy.

The world isn't so black and white.

 

[drop bear]

Correction: First, let's de-mystify things a bit and use the generic term "short-power". You can find it in Western boxing, Chinese boxing ("kung fu") Filipino boxing (FMA "cadena de mano") and just about any other well developed striking system. It takes years for some of us (me, for example) to get it right. Others develop surprisingly explosive "short power" early on. And yeah, they can be a big threat. My old Escrima instructor learned it from his Filipino coach as a teen and later used it very effectively as a boxer in the U.S. Airforce.

Of course "short power" alone isn't enough. But it's a great tool in the context of a good fighting system.

Of course you find it in other striking systems. It is not exactly a super secret. But that was what was being argued. That this is some sort of wing chun super move.

I just thought I would go along with the idea. Given that even though one of my coaches is an ex wing chun guy even he was not open to the mysteries of the one inch punch.

But yeah parlour tricks. The short power isn't. The one inch punch knocking you into backflips is. And I have met William Chung I originally came from Melbourne. My mum used to do kung fu with them.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc-Fgc7nRdE

 

[Steve]

Yep , and if your close enough to grab his ankle , he's also close enough to bend down and punch your head into the concrete.

That's actually not true, and if you knew the technique, you'd know why. With the foot on the hip, you wouldn't be able to reach my head. The only direction you could really go and not get immediately swept is back, to base out and also work to free the wrist.

You're being ridiculously defensive. You're contradicting yourself and speaking of things about which you are obviously, completely ignorant.

The goal, understandably, is to return to your feet. I get that. If you want to do that, in the video, an opportunity is there. It's obvious to any competent grappler. It's like a neon sign. But if you're not a grappler , you just don't know. The answer isn't to make stuff up and get defensive. It's to learn a little grappling.

Once again, you don't need to be a black belt. I'm a purple belt and That's a technique I'm very comfortable executing against people who are fighting back. It works in a Gi or clothing and also works well no Gi.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I don't have to be a grappler to control my opponent or utilize locks; nor would I really call that "grappling" when you maintain effective striking distance. You seem to be under the impression that only a grappler can utilize control, and that a striker is therefore at his mercy.

Of course a striker can

- control his opponent's arm,
- pull his opponent's body into him, and
- knock his opponent out with a powerful punch.

A clinch (or control) can always give you a chance for your knock out punch. There is no argument on that. But since your single arm can only control one of your opponent's arms. As long as you try to have a free arm to punch, your opponent will always have a free arm to deal with your punch. Since a grappler has no intention to punch you. He can afford to use both arms to control your arms/body.

In some wrestling game, you try to get a clinch but your opponent refuses. When that happen, you will just

- give up your offensive,
- play your defensive, and
- let your opponent to get clinch on you.

From a grappler's point of view, A clinch is a clinch. Whether you make it happen, or your opponent makes it happen, it won't make any difference one way or another. What will happen after that depends on individual's skill level.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

if your close enough to grab his ankle , he's also close enough to bend down and punch your head into the concrete.

Not sure you are talking about the stand up game or the ground game.

In stand up game, when you try to "grab your opponent's ankle", you will do the following:

- hook your foot behind his ankle,
- push his shoulder,
- when his foot comes up from the ground, you then grab that ankle.

Your shoulder push will force your opponent's body to bend backward (otherwise his foot will not come off the ground). When you do that, he will have no chance to punch at your head.

In the following clip, you can see that

- right hand control right wrist,
- left hand control right elbow,
- right hand push right shoulder.

In the whole process, your opponent's leading arm will have no chance to punch your head. Since you also use his leading arm to jam his back arm, his back arm can't punch your head either. In other words, your opponent's head shot is already under your consideration. Otherwise you will not apply your "ankle pick".

Not to get punched on the head should be the number one priority for all grapplers.

 

[geezer]

Fun fact. At 1:29 in the first video, he could easily execute what is called "Tripod" sweep in BJJ, reverse his position and come up on top, either to pass guard or stand up where he wants to be. Instead, because he knows no actual grappling, he remains on his back, in a position that you guys say you NEVER EVER want to be in. He'd need to control the ankle and then pretty much execute the sweep.

View attachment 18944

You can see in the image above, the point of execution and the similarity with the position in the video.

View attachment 18943

Steve, I can't speak for the guy in the WC video, but you're right about the similarity of these two positions. Also in the inherent efficiency of the way the BJJ guy sticks to and controls his opponent after executing the Tripod sweep. But you are really looking at this like a grappler. That particular WC guy is still coming from a striker's perspective even when on his back. He is trying to use percussive techniques to injure and disable his opponent, after which he presumably would use a thrusting kick to create distance so he could stand up.

As a grappler this seems odd to you, even illogical. And in a way it is. You'd think a WC guy would want to "stick" to his opponent and maintain control. After all, grappling is sort of like full body chi-sau right? But not for somebody who isn't comfortable with it. If being on the ground is alien to you, you will just want to kick the other guy away from you. And if that fails you are really up a creek. I'm not much of a grappler, and even I can see this.

I really feel that WC and some quality grappling experience complement each other beautifully. If only I were 20 or 30 years younger....

 

[Hanzou]

Steve, I can't speak for the guy in the WC video, but you're right about the similarity of these two positions. Also in the inherent efficiency of the way the BJJ guy sticks to and controls his opponent after executing the Tripod sweep. But you are really looking at this like a grappler. That particular WC guy is still coming from a striker's perspective even when on his back. He is trying to use percussive techniques to injure and disable his opponent, after which he presumably would use a thrusting kick to create distance so he could stand up.

As a grappler this seems odd to you, even illogical. And in a way it is. You'd think a WC guy would want to "stick" to his opponent and maintain control. After all, grappling is sort of like full body chi-sau right? But not for somebody who isn't comfortable with it. If being on the ground is alien to you, you will just want to kick the other guy away from you. And if that fails you are really up a creek. I'm not much of a grappler, and even I can see this.

You don't need to be a grappler to see that the WC's guy answer to that situation is illogical, and frankly quite silly. Consider how much time and effort it took for the WC guy to achieve the exact same position that Bjj achieved in a single move. Bjj's answer is efficient, and has a higher chance of success than attempting to lay on your back, and maintain enough control over your opponent to beat them into submission with kicks and punches, all while maintaining control of their wrist.

My other issue with this vid is again showing "anti-grappling" from a state of positional dominance. Why do you need anti-grappling when you've already achieved side control? It makes no sense. The attacker should be in side control, and the anti-grappler should be trying to get out of side control.

 

[drop bear]

Steve, I can't speak for the guy in the WC video, but you're right about the similarity of these two positions. Also in the inherent efficiency of the way the BJJ guy sticks to and controls his opponent after executing the Tripod sweep. But you are really looking at this like a grappler. That particular WC guy is still coming from a striker's perspective even when on his back. He is trying to use percussive techniques to injure and disable his opponent, after which he presumably would use a thrusting kick to create distance so he could stand up.

As a grappler this seems odd to you, even illogical. And in a way it is. You'd think a WC guy would want to "stick" to his opponent and maintain control. After all, grappling is sort of like full body chi-sau right? But not for somebody who isn't comfortable with it. If being on the ground is alien to you, you will just want to kick the other guy away from you. And if that fails you are really up a creek. I'm not much of a grappler, and even I can see this.

I really feel that WC and some quality grappling experience complement each other beautifully. If only I were 20 or 30 years younger....

Why would you come from a strikers perspective if you are on your back?

Do strikers fair particularly well from their backs? Have you ever seen striking done well from their backs?

There are strikes that work and bycicle kicks have their place. But seriously you would have to go to the guys who can fight off their backs to get tactics for fighting there. Throw comfort out the window. Throw your system out the window. Pre conceived notions dont help.take an idea. Test it a bunch of times. It will either work or it won't. All the "well technically it should work in principle" will not save a technique that does not work in practice.

That is where you get your anti grapple from.

And there is nothing stopping you standing up after you have swept the guy.

If you stay on your back you are going to get taken to pieces by the guy with a decent top game. The Gracie's tried it and guys like sakuraba figured out how to defeat it.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e6khZnrh4RE

 

[mook jong man]

It is a fight. You may get punched. But yeah we use that sweep and we allow the head punching.

Ok , so you do get punched from this attempted sweeping position.

Then maybe wouldn't it make a little more sense , to keep both your feet pointed straight towards him so he can't even get to your head at all.
And use both your legs to keep him at bay and blast kicks into his knees , shins , and groin

Why stuff around trying to even grab the arm , or grab the leg?
Both of your strongest weapons are already pointed at him , why not use them for something other than placing them in his hip.

 

[mook jong man]

I'd like to know how you'd be able to do that when your leg is planted into their hip, you're obstructing their rear leg, and you have control of one of their arms....

Your assuming that you could get control of that arm , might be easy to latch onto the sleeve of a gi.

Not so easy with no sleeve , or maybe even blood or sweat on the arms.
There is also the issue of if there is a size disparity , can you still get your leg up high enough to control the hip if the opponent is significantly taller than you so as to prevent him from hitting you.

 

[Steve]

Steve, I can't speak for the guy in the WC video, but you're right about the similarity of these two positions. Also in the inherent efficiency of the way the BJJ guy sticks to and controls his opponent after executing the Tripod sweep. But you are really looking at this like a grappler. That particular WC guy is still coming from a striker's perspective even when on his back. He is trying to use percussive techniques to injure and disable his opponent, after which he presumably would use a thrusting kick to create distance so he could stand up.

As a grappler this seems odd to you, even illogical. And in a way it is. You'd think a WC guy would want to "stick" to his opponent and maintain control. After all, grappling is sort of like full body chi-sau right? But not for somebody who isn't comfortable with it. If being on the ground is alien to you, you will just want to kick the other guy away from you. And if that fails you are really up a creek. I'm not much of a grappler, and even I can see this.

I really feel that WC and some quality grappling experience complement each other beautifully. If only I were 20 or 30 years younger....

This is exactly what I'm saying, geezer. If the idea is to get up so you can run away or at least get back to the range of fighting you are most comfortable with, WC "grappling" is suspect st best.

The guy "teaching" is very obviously making things up, and in doing so, he is creating unnecessary risk for his students. In bjj, we say you have to leave your ego at the door. Ego is where this kind of self delusion comes into play.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Steve]

Ok , so you do get punched from this attempted sweeping position.

Then maybe wouldn't it make a little more sense , to keep both your feet pointed straight towards him so he can't even get to your head at all.
And use both your legs to keep him at bay and blast kicks into his knees , shins , and groin

Why stuff around trying to even grab the arm , or grab the leg?
Both of your strongest weapons are already pointed at him , why not use them for something other than placing them in his hip.

The chances of that against an untrained opponent, such as both of the guys in the video, are nil. Sure, there is a counter to every technique, and a counter to every counter. So, theoretically, there are ways for the top guy to defend the sweep and punch the guy on the bottom. But, that's someone with at least a little training. YOU? You couldn't punch anyone from that position, because you demonstrate over and over that you're making things up, and/or defending techniques that are clearly fantasy. You wouldn't punch anyone because you would find yourself swept and in EXACTLY the position you don't want to be in: on the bottom defending yourself from your back.

What makes more sense is, if you are in that position, use techniques that are reliable to get back to where you actually have some skill, ie, standing up. That involves sweeping the bad guy so that you return to a more dominant position, allowing you to return to your feet and potentially disengage to run.

REgarding the question, why even try to grab the arm, I kind of wonder that myself. Ask the WC guy in your video. I was commenting on what he was doing, not why. He had wrist control, and was also creating and controlling the range with his legs. But, your question raises another question, if your opponent isn't controlling you in some way, and you aren't controlling your opponent in some way, why not simply stand up? Of course, there are dumb ways to do this, but you wouldn't know that because you are functionally incompetent on the ground. I really mean this without any malice at all. Your ego is blinding you.

The entire idea of WC grappling is as ridiculous as the idea of BJJ chi sau. I would never presume to suggest that BJJ could chi sau better than a WC guy.

 

[mook jong man]

Why would you come from a strikers perspective if you are on your back?

Do strikers fair particularly well from their backs? Have you ever seen striking done well from their backs?

Umm , because you can still strike from your back , they are called kicks.
Particularly relevant when you are on your back and someone is standing .
Great for targeting the lower legs and the groin.

Let's get into the fair dinkum department for a minute.
True story , about 8 years ago now , my missus was attacked on the street by a guy with a knife , to cut a long story short he wanted her hand bag and she didn't want to give it to him.

This maggot pushed her to the ground , at that point in time my wife had only had very minimal and haphazard Wing Chun training over 2 years , but she knew how to do stamp kicks from the ground.

Anyway , he continues to try and get the bag off her , he gets frustrated and slashes down at her with the knife , she brings up her arm in a Dai Sau to block , she then stamp kicked him in the lead shin three times in quick succession.

He had to abort his little mission because he was in so much pain he could hardly stand , she got off the ground and ran away and left him to stagger off to his waiting get away car.
This bastard who was never caught by the way , probably outweighed my wife by about 50 kgs.

She was left with a 4 cm scar on her outer forearm from a defensive cut that is still visible to this day.
If she didn't know how to target the shins with kicks she might have died that day.

So don't come on here and bloody tell us that kicks from the ground don't work , they might not be that effective in sports grappling land where no one wears shoes.
But out in the real world where you have shoes on , and you have the know how to to do these kicks properly , they work just fine.

 

[Hanzou]

Your assuming that you could get control of that arm , might be easy to latch onto the sleeve of a gi.

You don't need control of the arm/sleeve to perform that sweep, as demonstrated in this nogi variation that leads to an ankle lock;

[video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jOtW-nJkYZ8[/video]

Not so easy with no sleeve , or maybe even blood or sweat on the arms.

Indeed.....

 

[mook jong man]

You don't need control of the arm/sleeve to perform that sweep, as demonstrated in this nogi variation that leads to an ankle lock;

[video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jOtW-nJkYZ8[/video]




Indeed.....

Oh for God's sake , he has both his feet in his hips.
He would only have to straighten both his legs out sharply and launch that guy into a wall.

No need for the rest of the stuff.

 

[Hanzou]

Oh for God's sake , he has both his feet in his hips.
He would only have to straighten both his legs out sharply and launch that guy into a wall.

No need for the rest of the stuff.

He places both feet on the hips to stop his opponent's advance, then he quickly enters the sweep.

In the end, the point is that the sweep is a more realistic counter in that situation than attempting to beat a standing opponent down while you're on your back.

Launch the guy into a wall? I'm starting to think you're not being serious.

 

[Steve]

Oh for God's sake , he has both his feet in his hips.
He would only have to straighten both his legs out sharply and launch that guy into a wall.

No need for the rest of the stuff.

What if your opponent is based out? You're the dude who goes on and on about stance and being rooted. You can't keep your stories straight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk